NEW  JERSEY 

SAYS: 


6 


"NO!" 


'/  covet  for  New  Jersey  the 
honor  of  showing  the  way 
to  liberty  *  *  *." 

— Gov.  "Woodrovv  Wilson,  in 
his  second  annual  message 
to  New  Jersey  Legislature. 
January  14,  1913. 


REPORT 


OF  THE 


COMMISSION 
ON  MILITARY 
TRAINING  AND 
INSTRUCTION 


IN 


HIGH  SCHOOLS 


TO  THE 


NEW  JERSEY 
LEGISLATURE 

SESSION  OF  1917 


Reprinted  in  full  by  the 
American  Union  Ae^ainst  Militarism 


REPORT 


To  the  Senate  and  General  Assembly  of  the  State  of  New  Jersey : 
Pursuant  to  an  act  of  the  Legislature  of  the  State  of  New  Jersey, 
entitled  "An  act  to  create  and  provide  for  a  commission  to  investigate 
and  report  upon  military  training  and  instruction  for  national  defense 
in  high  schools,"  approved  March  i8,  1916,  the  following  were  ap- 
pointed to  serve  upon  a  commission  known  under  the  act  as  the  "Com- 
mission on  Military  Training  in  High  Schools":  A.  Dayton  OHphant, 
Assemblyman  from  Mercer  County,  Chairman;  WiUiam  W.  Smalley, 
Senator  from  Somerset  County;  Henry  Snyder,  Superintendent  of 
Schools,  Jersey  City;  Don  C.  BUss,  Superintendent  of  Schools,  Mont- 
clair;  and  Winfield  S.  Price,  of  the  New  Jersey  National  Guard. 

The  Commission  suffered  a  serious  loss  in  the  death  of  Senator 
Smalley,  which  occurred  December  27,  1916.  He  was  deeply  inter- 
ested in  the  work  of  the  Commission  and  took  an  active  part  in  its  inves- 
tigations up  to  the  time  of  his  illness. 

After  their  appointment  the  members  of  the  Commission  met  and 
organized  and  arranged  for  a  series  of  public  meetings  to  be  held  in 
different  cities  of  this  State.  All  persons  interested  in  the  subject  of 
military  training  in  the  schools  were  invited  to  attend  these  meetings 
and  address  the  Commission,  or  to  submit  to  the  Commission  any  per- 
tinent printed  or  written  data  or  information.  Each  meeting  was  ar- 
ranged for  well  in  advance  of  the  time  for  its  holding,  and  press  notices 
were  duly  placed  in  the  papers  published  in  the  vicinity  of  the  place  of 
holding  each  meeting  several  days  in  advance  of  the  date  of  the  meet- 
ing. The  meetings  were  held  at  Trenton,  Newark,  Plainfield  and 
Jersey  City. 

The  Commission  has  given  full  consideration  to  all  communications 
which  have  been  presented  to  it  and  to  all  available  information  bearing 
upon  the  subject  under  investigation,  has  thoroughly  studied  all  plans 
of  military  instruction  followed  in  this  country  and  other  countries,  or 
proposed  for  consideration,  and  has  made  a  special  study  of  the  military 
instruction  offered  to  the  pupils  in  the  high  schools  of  the  State  of 
Wyoming. 


Photo  of  President  Wilson  on  cover  copyrighted  by  Harris  and  Ewing. 


*•  ^  ^  t 


I- 

Those  who  urge  the  mihtary  training  of  pupils  of  the  high  schools 
urge  it  mainly  as  a  preparation  for  manhood  service  in  time  of  war.  It 
is  not  claimed  by  recognized  authorities,  so  far  as  we  have  been  able  to 
ascertain,  that  such  training  of  pupils  will  be  alone  sufficient  to  make 
efficient  soldiers.  It  must  be  admitted  that  to  be  effective  it  must  be 
supplemented  by  adequate  special  training  subsequent  to  the  period  of 
school  attendance.  This  State  has  not  made  provision  for  such  supple- 
mentary training.  Nor  has  the  National  Government  provided  the 
method  or  the  means  whereby  adults  maybe  trained  in  sufficient  numbers 
to  supply  the  demand  in  time  of  need. 

Many  persons,  who  advocate  military  training  in  the  schools,  regard 
it  alone  as  sufficient  for  military  purposes.  This  view  is  very  super- 
ficial and  would  not  be  mentioned  here  except  for  its  prevalence.  Such 
persons  do  not  carry  it  to  its  logical  conclusion,  and  perhaps  do  not  desire 
to  do  so.  Juvenile  training  must,  at  some  time,  be  followed  by  manhood 
training  and  service;  otherwise  it  can  have  no  value. 

Furthermore,  no  effective  plan  of  universal  military  service  by  adults 
or  even  of  the  service  of  classes  of  adults,  selected  for  the  purpose  of 
limiting  the  number,  has  been  adopted  by  this  State  or  the  National 
Government.  The  Commission  is  aware  of  the  constitutional  and 
statutory  provisions  made  by  the  nation  and  the  State  for  the  service  of 
the  militia  of  the  State,  but  does  not  regard  these  as  constituting  such  a 
plan. 

It  follows  that  an  inquiry  such  as  this,  which  is  limited  to  the  pro- 
priety of  military  instruction  in  high  schools,  must  be  too  narrow,  since 
it  cannot  include  a  consideration  of  the  subsequent  and  much  larger  and 
more  highly  specialized  part  of  the  course  of  instruction  which  may  be 
designed  to  train  the  soldier.  It  follows  equally,  logically,  that  in  the 
absence  of  any  sufficiently  comprehensive  plan  of  the  service  of  adults, 
the  pupils  for  whose  military  training  we  may  lay  the  foundation  may 
never  desire  or  be  required  to  serve  as  soldiers. 

A  complete  course  of  instruction  of  any  kind  must  aim  at  definite 
results  and  must  be  designed  in  its  entirety  to  secure  these  results.  A 
thorough  and  satisfactory  study  of  the  problem  under  consideration 


2 


would  include  the  whole  course  of  military  instruction  necessary  to  pro- 
duce the  efficient  soldier,  in  which  the  military  instruction  of  high 
school  pupils,  if  required  or  desired,  would  be  only  preliminary  or  funda- 
mental. As  has  been  said,  your  Commission  is  not  expected  to  consider 
the  larger  problem,  but  reasoning  backward  from  the  results  to  be 
secured  by  a  complete  course  of  instruction  has  endeavored  to  reach  a 
conclusion  as  to  whether  it  is  necessary  or  desirable  that  military  in- 
struction in  high  schools  should  form  part  of  such  a  course. 

Just  as  it  is  difficult  to  consider  the  military  instruction  of  high  school 
pupils  without  keeping  in  mind  the  rest  of  a  complete  course,  so  it  is 
difficult  to  see  why  New  Jersey  or  any  State  should  feel  obligated  to 
assume  the  burden  of  training  soldiers  for  the  national  defense  without 
the  full  cooperation  of  the  other  States  and  of  the  Federal  Government. 
The  common  defense  is  a  matter  of  national  concern  and  duty.  While 
the  citizens  of  this  State  may  feel  impelled  by  patriotic  fervor  to  assume 
military  service,  their  numbers  cannot  be  large  enough  unless  the  citizens 
of  the  other  States  feel  the  same  impulse.  For  a  similar  reason,  the 
State  is  not  justified  in  acting  alone,  without  similar  action  by  othef 
States,  in  imposing  on  the  pupils  of  its  high  schools  the  duty  of  military 
preparation.  In  saying  this  we  do  not  wish  to  be  understood  as  desiring 
to  urge  that  the  pupils  of  this  State  ought  to  be  relieved  of  the  duty  of 
preparing  for  participation  in  the  common  defense,  but  do  desire  to 
insist  that  such  isolated  action  will  be  insufficient  and  comparatively 
useless.  Congress  has  power  "to  provide  for  the  common  defense"  by 
training  those  who  are  included  in  the  militia.  It  has  no  power  to  direct 
the  courses  of  instruction  in  the  schools  of  the  States.  Nevertheless, 
the  military  instruction  of  adults  and  of  the  pupils  of  the  schools  is  a 
matter  of  national  policy  and  must  be  treated  as  such  either  by  Congress 
alone,  or  by  Congress  in  cooperation  with  all  the  States.  It  has  been 
said  that  if  the  States  legislate  independently  in  the  matter,  the  instruc- 
tion will  be  diverse  and  will  follow  as  many  courses  as  there  are  States, 
and  that  there  can  be  no  harmony  of  action.  We  do  not  object  to  such 
independent  legislation  for  that  reason,  but  for  the  reason  that  there 
will  be  no  certainty  of  proper  action  in  any  State,  that  military  training 
will  be  found  "in  spots,"  and  might  just  as  well  be  omitted. 


1 


3 


n. 

It  is  not  easy  to  justify  the  selection  of  the  high  school  pupils  of  the 
State  as  the  only  young  people  who  shall  be  the  recipients  of  military 
training.  The  duty  of  the  common  defense  is  one  which  belongs  prop- 
erly to  all  who  are  physically  capable,  and  none  should  be  deprived  of  the 
opportunity  of  qualifying  himself,  if  such  opportunity  is  offered  to  any, 
to  perform  this  duty  effectively.  It  cannot  be  claimed  that  the  boys  of 
the  high  schools  are  exceptional,  and  that  they  are  the  only  ones  who  can 
receive  this  instruction  profitably.  If  there  is  any  advantage  in  it,  all 
boys  equal  in  age  and  physique  to  high  school  boys  can  receive  it  with 
equal  probability  of  profit.  If  it  is  claimed  that  the  reason  for  provid- 
ing this  instruction  for  the  high  schools  is  that  the  pupils  can  best  aff'ord 
the  time  for  it,  it  must  be  answered  that  very  many  of  these  derive  an 
income  from  labor  out  of  school  hours  which  enables  them  to  at  tend 
school.  These  are  as  worthy  of  exemption  from  military  instructi  ra  as 
those  who  leave  school  because  they  lack  the  ambition  to  continue  their 
leducation  or  because  they  are  compelled  to  do  so  by  circumsta  aces. 
Whether  this  instruction  is  compulsory  or  optional  with  pupils  ol'  the 
high  schools,  if  required  or  oft'ered  at  all,  it  should  apply  to  all  boys,  out 
of  school  as  well  as  in  school,  of  prescribed  ages  and  strength. 

Such  exercises  of  a  military  character,  as  have  been  introduced  into 
high  schools,  have  not  served  appreciably  to  induce  pupils  to  remain  in 
school,  or,  in  other  words,  to  render  inoperative  those  influences  which 
tend  to  make  pupils  leave  school.  It  must  be  concluded,  therefore,  that 
if  military  instruction  in  high  schools  is  regarded  not  as  a  privilege  but 
as  an  obligation,  it  will  impose  an  additional  burden  upon  education, 
which  the  pupils  over  fourteen  years  of  age  may  evade  by  leaving  school, 
if  they  so  desire.  It  will,  therefore,  serve  to  counteract  the  influence  of 
the  stimuli,  statutory  and  social,  which  are  applied  for  the  purpose  of 
prolonging  school  attendance. 

Military  training  and  service,  if  they  are  necessary,  are  an  obligation 
of  citizenship,  not  of  education  alone. 

It  is  difficult  to  contemplate  with  satisfaction  or  even  complacency  the 
social  cleavage  which  is  bound  to  result  from  a  system  of  military  in- 


struction  which  is  applied  to  high  school  pupils  and  not  to  other  boys. 
To  assign  or  reserve  the  privilege,  or  duty,  or  obligation,  however  it  is 
regarded,  of  preparing  to  fight  for  the  country  to  the  better  educated 
class  is  just  as  repugnant  to  democratic  ideals  as  was  the  practice  in  days 
long  gone  by  of  leaving  it  to  the  nobility.  To  select  high  school  pupils 
for  this  training  is  open  to  the  same  objection  as  would  be  a  plan  of 
selecting  adults  for  actual  military  service  solely  on  the  basis  of  their 
occupations  or  professions,  a  plan  which  would  receive  no  consideration. 

It  may  be  said  that  military  training  in  high  schools  can  be  defended 
on  the  ground  that  the  higher  education  of  the  pupils  makes  it  possible 
that  they  will  become  officers.  But  if  this  is  so,  what  provision  is  there 
for  training  the  private  soldier? 

Considering  the  proposition  from  all  points  of  view,  we  are  forced  to 
the  conclusion  that  it  is  suggested  not  by  a  consideration  of  military  or 
educational  propriety,  but  by  the  existence  of  the  public-school  organi- 
zation. In  this  case,  as  in  many  others,  the  ease  with  which  the  plan 
may  be  grafted  on  it,  makes  a  stronger  appeal  than  the  merits  of  the 
plan  or  the  probability  of  its  success. 

m. 

Thus  far  we  have  considered  the  proposition  of  juvenile  military 
instruction  as  involving  the  separation  of  the  boys  of  the  State  into  two 
classes,  viz.,  those  attending  the  high  schools  and  those  not  attending 
these  schools,  and  have  given  specific  reasons  for  concluding  that  it  is 
not  advisable  to  use  only  the  former  for  military  purposes.  There  are, 
however,  many  important  considerations  of  a  general  character,  which 
apply  with  especial  force  not  only  to  the  military  training  of  high  school 
boys,  but  to  that  of  all  boys  in  all  secondary  and  elementary  schools,  and 
which  must  be  mentioned  in  this  report. 

It  is  specially  significant  that  none  of  the  great  nations  of  Europe,  in 
which  the  military  service  of  adults  has  been  universal  and  compulsory, 
and  which  have  shown  phenomenal  efficiency  in  the  present  war,  has 
thought  it  necessary  to  resort  to  the  military  training  of  its  boys.  With 


5 


the  most  instructive  and  convincing  example  of  these  nations  before  us, 
does  it  not  seem  incomprehensible  that  our  State  and  National  Gov- 
ernment should  seem  to  shrink  from  the  compulsory  military  training 
and  service  of  adults  and  at  the  same  time  prefer  to  consider  the  imposi- 
tion of  compulsory  training  upon  minors,  whose  dependent  condition 
prevents  the  possibility  of  the  refusal  of  such  training?  Even  the  federal 
military  system  of  Switzerland,  which  exacts  compulsory  service  from 
men  over  twenty  years  of  age,  and  which  is  looked  upon  with  much  favor 
as  being  peculiarly  adapted  to  a  republican  form  of  government,  does 
not  impose  compulsory  training  upon  school  boys. 

Military  authorities  are  by  no  means  united  in  its  advocacy.  General 
Leonard  Wood  has  recently  said,  "  Personally,  I  do  not  believe  we  should 
give  the  training  until  the  year  in  which  the  youth  becomes  19."  Gen- 
eral Baden-Powell  said,  "Drill  a  school  boy  and  spoil  a  soldier." 

The  military  training  of  boys  gives  no  assurance  that  they  will  enter 
military  service  voluntarily  when  they  become  men.  It  is  well  known 
that  comparatively  few  of  those  who  have  been  members  of  school  cadet 
corps  enlist  as  members  of  the  National  Guard.  The  recent  experience 
of  AustraUa  is  significant.  Although  it  has  for  some  years  had  compul- 
sory military  training  for  males  between  fourteen  and  twenty-six  years 
of  age,  and  its  people  might  consequently  be  regarded  as  prepared  and 
zealous  for  service,  the  number  of  enlistments  in  the  present  war  has 
fallen  far  short  of  the  expectations  and  requirements  of  Great  Britain. 
Furthermore,  the  people  by  referendum  last  fall  rejected  the  proposition 
to  adopt  conscription  or  compulsory  service  in  the  greatest  crisis  in  their 
history.  On  the  other  hand,  in  our  Civil  War,  New  Jersey,  without 
preliminary  training  of  any  kind,  either  of  men  or  of  boys,  furnished 
10,000  more  men  without  conscription  than  the  National  Government 
required. 

Training  in  the  real  work  of  the  soldier,  to  be  of  value,  should  be  con- 
ducted under  conditions  which  are  as  nearly  like  actual  war  conditions 
as  it  is  possible  to  make  them,  and  should  include  such  operations  as 
entrenching,  marching  with  full  service  equipment,  all  the  activities  of 
camp  life,  abundant  practice  in  the  use  of  weapons — rifles,  bayonets, 


6 


grenades,  machine  guns,  artillery  of  all  kinds.*  It  must  be  admitted 
that  boys  of  high  school  age  cannot  undergo  practical  training  of  such  a 
strenuous  character  with  any  hope  of  success,  and,  it  must  also  be  said, 
without  fear  of  serious  injury.  At  the  same  time,  it  ought  to  be  said  that 
much  of  this  work  of  real  training  could  not  be  done  because  of  lack  of 
facilities. 

IV. 

It  is  sometimes  claimed  that  military  training  is  the  best  agency  for 
inculcating  obedience.  But  if  this  claim  is  carefully  considered  it  will 
be  found  that  obedience  to  military  authority  is  generally  unthinking. 
It  is  often  blind  and  superficial,  not  real.  During  actual  war  men  will- 
ingly undergo  training  because  the  work  is  definitely  motivated;  but 
when  peace  comes  and  men  go  into  barracks,  they  feel  that  there  is 
nothing  of  value  in  drill  and  there  is  a  consequent  tendency  to  evade  its 
requirements.  This  kind  of  obedience  has  been  and  may  be  secured  by 
similar  school  methods.  It  is  obedience  under  restraint.  When  this  is 
removed,  laxity  in  discipline  often  follows.  The  discipline  of  the  schools 
aims  not  at  isolated  acts  of  obedience  under  special  circumstances,  but 
at  the  habil  of  obedience  to  elders  and  persons  in  authority.  It  is  a  psy- 
chological fallacy  to  suppose  that  obedience  to  military  authority,  indeed, 
obedience  exacted  under  any  peculiar  circumstances,  may  automatically 
be  translated  into  the  general  habit  of  obedience.  The  same  may  be 
said  of  such  qualities  as  alertness,  promptness,  industry,  truthfulness, 
etc.  It  is  by  no  means  capable  of  demonstration  that  those  who  have 
had  military  training,  or  been  subject  to  military  discipline,  are  superior 
to  other  citizens  in  the  possession  of  these  qualities. 

V. 

The  development  of  patriotism  in  our  youth  is  sometimes  urged  as  a 
reason  for  introducing  military  instruction  in  the  schools.  Military 

*  See  the  testimony  on  the  worthlessness  of  "conventional  military  training," 
given  by  Major  William  C.  Harllee,  of  the  U.  S.  Marine  Corps,  before  a  subcom- 
mittee of  the  Senate  Committee  on  Military  Affairs,  January  5,  191 7,  and  re-printed 
in  the  Congressional  Record,  February  17,  1917.  Note  by  American  Union  Against 
Militarism. 


7 


forms  and  observances  may  furnish  opportunities  for  the  manifestation 
of  patriotic  feeUng,  but  they  cannot  be  regarded  as  its  cause.  They 
cannot  even  always  be  regarded  as  evidences  of  its  existence.  There 
are  more  effective,  more  certain  methods  of  teaching  real,  intelligent 
patriotism.  Emphasis  must  be  placed  upon  the  study  of  our  country's 
history,  of  its  social  and  economic  development  and  relations,  of  its 
principles  and  institutions,  of  its  provisions  for  the  prosperity,  happi- 
ness, and  welfare  of  its  people,  and  of  its  civic  and  social  life,  and  not 
upon  such  a  single,  narrow  activity  as  military  instruction. 

Obedience,  patriotism,  orderly  behavior,  and  other  desirable  traits 
which  have  been  or  might  be  mentioned,  are  not  results  peculiar  to 
military  training,  nor  are  they  qualities  which  belong  peculiarly  to 
military  service.  They  are  qualities  which  every  upright,  useful  citi- 
zen ought  to  possess,  and  which  it  is  the  aim  of  all  school  discipline  and 
school  exercises  to  develop  and  train.  Instruction  in  them  is  ethical 
and  moral,  not  military.  It  is  only  by  impressing  upon  pupils  the  truth 
that  they  are  necessary  in  all  walks  of  life,  and  not  only  in  the  military 
sphere,  that  this  kind  of  instruction  may  be  made  universal  and  thor- 
ough. 

The  education  of  the  schools  is  fundamental  and  aims  to  train  pupils  for 
life.  For  this  purpose  the  whole  school  period  is  needed.  Real  military 
instruction  includes  exercises  of  a  highly  specialized  character  and  aims 
at  specific  purposes  which  are  unduly  emphasized  and  are  thus  likely  to 
draw  the  pupil's  attention  away  from  the  chief  purpose  of  his  education. 
Military  training  must  aim  at  military  service,  but  military  service  will 
not  be  the  chosen  occupation  of  many  boys. 

VI. 

It  has  been  our  aim  to  consider  effective  military  training  as  dis- 
tinguished from  military  drill  and  such  similar  activities  as  are  often 
found  in  schools,  and  to  give  our  conclusions  thereon,  particularly  as  they 
concern  high  school  pupils.  It  may  be  inferred  from  what  has  been  said 
that  we  are  opposed  to  military  training  in  toto.  Such  an  inference  is 
not  justified.    While  the  limits  of  the  problem  presented  to  us  do  not 


/ 


8 

r 

permit  us  to  discuss  the  subject  in  its  broader  aspects,  it  is  proper  for  us 
to  say  that  we  beHeve  it  is  the  duty  of  the  citizen  to  defend  the  country 
should  the  nation  decide  that  circumstances  require  it.  Wliile,  as  we 
have  said  before,  it  is  not  within  our  province  to  express  any  opinion 
regarding  the  necessity  of  the  compulsory  military  training  and  service 
of  adults,  it  is  proper  for  us  to  express  our  conviction  that,  if  it  should  be 
determined  that  preparation  for  defense  in  the  form  of  military  training 
is  necessary,  this  should  frankly  be  exacted  of  those  who  by  reason  of 
maturity  and  strength  of  body  are  able  to  receive  it  profitably  and  not  of 
frail  boys. 

The  term  military  training  or  military  instruction  is  generally  misun- 
derstood or  misused.  Very  few  who  use  these  terms  think  of  them  as 
designating  the  intensive,  specialized  form  of  instruction  which  is  de- 
signed to  train  the  soldier  effectively  for  the  practical  work  of  actual 
warfare  as  it  is  now  carried  on.  What  most  of  those  who  discuss  the 
matter  have  in  mind  is  military  drill,  or  the  exercises  of  a  military  charac- 
ter in  which  the  members  of  a  cadet  corps  participate.  There  is  a  vast 
difference  between  such  training  and  the  military  training  which  we  have 
been  considering.  The  former  with  its  drills  and  parades  is  commonly 
regarded,  even  by  military  authorities,  as  seriously  deficient  as  a  scheme 
of  up-to-date  military  training.  To  quote  an  Australian  military 
authority,  "Big  parades  are  not  our  ideal,  nor  of  any  great  practical 
value." 

vn. 

It  is  to  the  class  of  military  drill  that  the  Commission  would  assign 
the  practice  in  the  high  schools  of  Wyoming,  which,  as  has  been  said, 
members  of  the  Com,mission  observed.  In  all  the  cities  of  the  State  the 
membership  in  the  cadet  corps  numbers  only  about  three  hundred. 
Very  little,  if  any,  of  the  instruction  belongs  to  the  category  of  real  mili- 
tary training.  No  evidence  of  regular,  persistent  rifle  practice,  or  of 
instruction  in  the  activities  of  military  camp  life  was  found.  On  the  other 
hand,  experience  in  these  activities  has  been  very  desultory.    Nearly  all 


9 


the  exercises  are  those  which  are  commonly  performed  on  the  parade 
ground  or  in  school  halls,  and  are  characteristic  of  the  school  cadet  corps 
with  which  all  are  famiUar.  Special  attention  has  been  given  in  some 
schools  to  "wall  scaling,"  an  activity  which  seems  military  in  character, 
but  which  in  the  actual  performance  is  a  purely  acrobatic  exercise. 
There  is  no  reference  to  the  ultimate  purpose  which  it  ought  to  serve 
and  for  which  it  is  practiced  in  the  army.  As  conducted  in  the  schools 
of  Wyoming  it  aims  at  physical  agility  and  perfection  in  team  work, 
stimulated  by  the  keen  competition  which  is  encouraged  and  must  be 
regarded  as  belonging  to  the  domain  of  physical  training.  No  system- 
atic plan,  followed  generally  by  all  the  schools,  could  be  discovered; 
indeed,  it  is  difficult  to  conceive  of  any  well  organized  State  plan  for 
systematic  military  training  in  a  commonwealth  where  only  one  high 
school  employs  a  physical  and  military  training  instructor,  and  where 
the  supervision  of  the  drills  in  all  other  high  schools  is  delegated  to  one 
of  the  regular  teachers,  who  is  paid  a  small  additional  compensation  for 
his  services.  In  one  city  wall  scaling  was  the  predominant  activity, 
while  military  drill  was  regarded  as  subordinate.  In  others  the  latter 
was  emphasized,  while  wall  scaling  was  neglected.  In  one  school  mem- 
bership was  compulsory  for  all  able-bodied  boys,  in  the  others  it  was 
voluntary.  There  was  no  similarity  in  the  uniforms  adopted.  In  one 
school  the  cadets  wore  a  naval  uniform.  In  one  school  both  boys 
and  girls  were  required  to  wear  uniforms  constantly  during  school 
sessions.  The  requirement  that  girls  should  wear  uniforms  was  due 
to  social  reasons,  not  military.  The  practice  of  enlisting  girls  as 
"sponsors"  seemed  not  generally  followed.  Where  the  practice  was 
observed,  the  girls  were  not  instructed  in  first  aid,  bandaging,  and 
other  duties  commonly  considered  appropriate  to  girls,  but  were  ex- 
pected to  attend  the  drills  and  other  exercises  for  the  purpose  of  influ- 
encing the  personal  demeanor  of  the  cadets  and  stimulating  them  in 
their  work.  While  instructors  and  cadets  showed  great  enthusiasm, 
the  narrowness  and  monotony  of  the  instruction  were  clearly  demon- 
strated by  the  abandonment  of  wall  scaling  in  two  schools,  one  of  which 


lO 


had  made  a  record  for  rapidity,  and  the  abandonment  by  one  important 
city,  whose  high  school  maintained  a  cadet  corps  for  several  years,  of 
the  whole  plan  of  military  drill.  It  should  be  noted  that  the  University 
of  Wyoming,  located  at  Laramie,  which  gives  compulsory  military 
instruction  to  its  students  with  national  aid,  has  not  organized  a  cadet 
corps  in  the  high  school  connected  with  its  normal  department.  On 
the  whole,  while  training  of  a  special  character  may  in  some  cases  give 
special  bent  or  inclination,  the  exercises  of  these  schools  have  little 
military  value.  At  the  same  time,  information  which  we  received  proves 
that  the  special  stimtilus  to  habitual  correctness  of  personal  conduct, 
which  military  drill  is  claimed  to  give,  has  no  exceptional  force.  We 
must  commend  the  enthusiasm  of  those  who  organized  the  cadet  corps 
in  the  several  cities  and  have  maintained  the  instruction  in  them,  and 
the  high  ideals  of  physical  attainment  and  of  ethical  conduct  which  they 
inspire  the  cadets  to  try  to  reach,  but  we  are  forced  by  our  observation 
to  conclude  that  better  and  more  lasting  results  in  these  directions  can 
be  secured  in  other  ways. 

If  the  State  should  be  inclined  to  consider  this  form  of  training,  not- 
withstanding its  deficiencies,  it  should  keep  in  mind  the  cost.  During 
the  year  J915-1916,  46,103  pupils  were  enrolled  in  the  high  schools  of 
the  State,  of  whom  24,716  were  girls  and  21,387  were  boys.  If  we  elimi- 
nate boys  who  are  under  age  or  physically  unfit,  we  should  still  have 
available  for  compulsory  training  many  thousands  for  whom  equipment 
and  instructors  would  have  to  be  provided.  It  is  clear  that  the  plan 
would  cost  many  thousands  of  dollars  each  year,  while  the  results 
obtained  would  be  comparatively  negligible  so  far  as  real  military  pur- 
poses are  concerned.  It  is  not  necessary,  however,  for  this  State  to 
incur  the  great  expense  involved.  In  accordance  with  Section  56  of  the 
Act  of  Congress,  approved  June  3,  1916,  and  with  General  Orders  No.  48 
of  the  War  Department,  dated  September  19,  19 16,  the  Secretary  of 
War  is  authorized  to  supply  military  equipment  and  instructors  for 
pturposes  of  military  training  to  schools  under  certain  conditions.  Con- 


I 

1 1 

has  thus  recognized  the  propriety  of- handling  the  matter  nationally 
■elieving  the  States  of  the  expense.  We  are  informed  that  Con- 
has  not  as  yet  made  adequate  financial  provision  to  carry  the  act 
:ull  effect.  Whether  legislative  action  by  the  State  is  necessary  to  ' 
)rize  the  schools  to  apply  the  act  is  a  question  which  should  be 
mined  by  legal  advice.  At  any  rate,  if  such  action  is  necessary,  we 
)t  recommend  it,  because,  for  reasons  which  have  been  made  clear, 
o  not  favor  the  introduction  of  any  form  of  military  training,  as 
into  the  schools. 

lile  military  drill  is  acknowledged  to  be  inadequate  for  military 
OSes,  advantage  is  claimed  for  it  as  a  means  of  character  develop- 
,  of  strengthening  those  desirable  personal  qualities  which  are 
ned  to  be  peculiar  to  the  soldier,  and  as  a  means  of  furnishing  exer- 
)r  physical  training.  We  have  already  pointed  out  that  the  devel- 
;nt  of  character  should  be  and  is  the  object  of  all  school  exercises, 
:hat  the  assumption  that  military  exercises  furnish  the  only  or  the 
means  of  securing  it  has  no  foundation.  No  evidence  has  ever  been 
;nted  which  demonstrates  that  members  of  the  school  cadet  corps 
etter  morally  or  are  more  free  from  moral  defects  than  other  school 

vin. 

a  sole  means  of  physical  training  it  is  condemned  almost  univer- 
by  experts  in  that  subject.    Dr.  Sargent,  of  Harvard  University, 
"  It  is  not  an  adequate  means  for  physical  training,  being  not  only 
limited  in  its  activity,  but  actually  harmful  in  its  effect  on  boys 
than  eighteen  or  twenty  years  of  age.    It  does  not  offer  sufficient 
irtunity  for  the  development  of  the  individual's  powers  of  muscular 
mental  coordination,  and  the  exercise  of  judgment  under  unusual 
trying  circumstances."    Dr.  Ehler,  of  the  University  of  Wisconsin, 
,  "Military  'drill'  is  an  enthusiasm-killing,  contempt-developing 
Imill.    Preparedness    involves    *    *    *    primarily    and  funda- 


I 


12 


mentally  the  possession  of  vitality,  endurance,  integrity  of  structure  and 
function  of  every  organ,  alertness,  bodily  skill,  self-control,  hardihood, 
courage — in  other  words,  the  fullest  development  of  the  physical,  mental, 
and  emotional  powers,  the  result  of  real  physical  education  *  *  *  _ 
Let  us  not  confound  drill  with  training,  nor  substitute  'military  drill' 
for  physical  education." 

The  difficulty  experienced  by  all  military  companies  organized  in 
schools,  in  which  membership  is  voluntary,  in  retaining  their  members, 
and  the  frequent  disbandment  of  such  companies,  testify  to  the  monot- 
ony of  their  work  and  their  failure  to  offer  permanent  attraction  to  the 
young. 

But  in  the  matter  of  genuine  physical  training,  in  the  full  realization 
of  the  tremendous  importance  of  the  development  and  maintenance  of 
the  bodily  vigor  of  boys  and  girls,  of  men  and  women,  in  the  systematic 
and  persistent  training  of  all  the  members  and  organs  of  the  body  to 
perform  their  functions  accurately  and  successfully,  in  the  desire  to 
maintain  a  nation  of  healthy  people,  we  are  all  on  common  grounds. 

Military  authorities  admit  that  the  fundamental  aim  of  every  form 
of  military  training  must  be  to  cultivate  physical  health  and  strength. 
As  Dr.  George  Fisher,  Secretary  of  the  Physical  Department,  Inter- 
national Committee,  Y.  M.  C.  A.,  and  New  York  State  Military  Train- 
ing Commissioner,  puts  it,  "  In  the  training  camps  in  England  it  takes  a 
full  year  to  get  the  men  in  condition  after  they  enlist.  England's  experi- 
ence in  this  war  indicates  that  the  big  problem  is  not  primarily  the 
training  of  the  men  in  military  tactics  or  drill,  but  conditioning  the  men. 
Therefore,  the  lesson  to  us  should  be  to  discover  what  methods  can  best 
be  used  to  put  and  keep  men  in  good  physical  condition." 

If  any  evidence  of  the  accuracy  of  this  opinion  were  needed,  it  is 
necessary  only  to  consult  the  records  of  the  United  States  War  Depart- 
ment. The  Surgeon-General  has  courteously  supplied  us  with  the  fol- 
lowing statistics  concerning  applicant  for  enlistments  in  the  United 
States  Army: 


13 


Number  of  applicants  for  enlistment  in  the  United  States  Army,  furnished  by  the  several 
recruiting  districts,  together  with  the  number  accepted  or  rejected  in  said  districts, 
fiscal  years  ending  June  jo,  igii  to  1915. 


Fiscal  years 
ending  June  30. 

Total 
Number  of 
Applicants. 

Accepted. 

Rejected. 

Niunber. 

Per  cent 
of  total 
Applicants. 

Number. 

Per  cent 
of  total 
Applicants. 

191 1  

1913  

1914  

1915  

Total  for  5  years  

Annual  average  

136,978 
149,693 
123,664 

168,527 
168,842 

29,041 

31,587 
21 ,268 
35,902 
39,245 

21.2 
21 . 1 

17.2 
21.3 
23.2 

107,937 
1 18, 106 
102 ,396 
132 ,625 
129,597 

78.8 
78  9 
82  .8 
78  7 
76.8 

747 . 704 

157,043 

21.0 

590,661 

79.0 

149,540 

31,408 

118,132 

Note. — These  only  include  applicants  accepted  at  recruiting  stations.  They  are 
then  sent  to  Recruit  Depots  where  they  are  further  critically  examined  by  medical 
officers. 


It  will  be  noticed  that  these  statistics  are  based  on  preliminary  exami- 
nations at  the  recruiting  stations,  and  do  not  include  the  final  examina- 
tions which  reduced  still  further  the  number  of  men  accepted. 

Of  41,168  who  volunteered  for  enlistment  in  1915  in  the  U.  S.  Marine 
Corps,  only  3,833,  or  about  nine  per  cent,  were  accepted. 

Of  the  men  who  were  in  the  National  Guard  of  the  States  when  mo- 
bilized on  the  Mexican  border  last  year  and  mustered  into  the  United 
States  service,  all  of  whom  had  been  subject  to  military  training  and 
service  and  were  assumed  to  be  physically  fit,  thirty  per  cent  had  to  be 
discharged  because  of  physical  disability. 

It  is  evident  that  even  if  the  training  of  our  youth  had  military  service 
only  as  its  aim,  that  training  should  be  physical,  not  military. 

On  the  other  hand,  all  the  statistics  furnished  by  the  reports  of  medi- 
cal experts  in  connection  with  the  medical  inspection  of  school  children 
and  college  students  in  all  countries,  of  the  medical  examiners  of  life 
insurance  companies,  and  of  all  organizations  for  whose  employees  a 
sound  body  and  health  are  requisites,  testify  unanimously  and  strongly 
to  the  wide  prevalence  of  serious  physical  defects,  which  greatly  inter- 
fere with  the  efficient  and  satisfactory  performance  of  the  duties  of  civil 


14 


life.  In  order  therefore  that  all  citizens  may  be  properly  trained  and 
prepared  to  perform  effectively  all  their  duties,  no  matter  what  they  may 
be,  we  recommend  and  strongly  urge  that  the  necessary  steps  be  taken 
to  provide  for  all  the  schools  of  the  State  a  complete  and  thorough  sys- 
tem of  physical  training.  This  system  should  be  compulsory  on  all 
pupils,  and  should  include  carefully  selected  exercises  adapted  to  the 
different  ages  of  pupils  and  designed  to  protect  their  health,  stimulate 
bodily  functions  and  promote  physical  strength.  It  should  apply  to 
all  girls  as  well  as  boys.  It  should  aim  to  prevent  bodily  abnormalities 
or  deformities,  or  to  correct  them,  if  they  are  found  to  exist.  It  should 
include  personal  and  community  sanitation,  first  aid  in  emergencies, 
bandaging,  and  all  forms  of  instruction  in  personal  safety.  It  should 
encourage  outdoor  activities.  It  should  provide  abundant  games  for 
all  pupils  in  which  group  activities  are  prominent  and  in  which  appeal 
may  be  made  to  the  spirit  of  competition.  It  may  include  those  features 
of  military  drill  which  properly  serve  the  purposes  of  physical  training, 
but  which  must  be  regarded  as  subordinate  to  these  purposes.  It  may 
even  include  practice  with  the  miniature  or  the  service  rifle,  if  such  prac- 
tice is  regarded  as  necessary  to  develop  steadiness  of  nerve,  bodily  con- 
trol and  accuracy  of  sight.  In  the  case  of  such  exercises  the  educational 
error  does  not  lie  in  their  use,  but  in  the  exaggerated  military  purpose 
which  they  are  made  to  serve.  All  the  features  and  exercises  of  the 
thorough  course  of  physical  training  which  we  recommend  should  be 
intimately  connected  and  interrelated,  on  the  one  hand,  with  the  moral 
or  character  forming  instruction  of  the  schools,  and  on  the  other,  with 
the  complete  provisions  for  medical  inspection  which  have  already  been 
made  compulsory  by  law. 

We  take  the  liberty  of  submitting  herewith  two  bills  which  embody 
the  recommendations  made  above  regarding  compulsory  physical  train- 
ing, and  hope  that  they  may  be  enacted  into  law. 
Respectfully  submitted, 

A.  DAYTON  OLIPHANT,  Chairman, 

HENRY  SNYDER, 

DON  C.  BLISS, 

WINFIELD  S.  PRICE. 


15 


r/fw  report  effectually  killed  the  attempt  definitely  to  fasten  com- 
pulsory military  training  upon  the  secondary  schools  of  the  State, 
though  the  Legislature,  as  a  sop  to  the  militarists,  amended  the  physi- 
cal training  acts  referred  to  so  as  to  give  the  State  Board  of  Education 
the  power  to  add  military  training  to  the  course  if  it  so  desires.  It 
is  permissive,  not  obligatory.  The  Secretary  of  State  reports  that  the 
Board  has  not  availed  itself  of  the  opportunity  presented,  although  the 
law  has  been  in  force  since  March  23,  iQiy.  Others  add  that  the 
Board  is  extremely  unlikely  to  do  so  in  the  face  of  the  unanimous 
and  carefully  considered  report  of  this  Commission.  In  the  absence 
of  action  by  the  State  Board  of  Education  military  training  can  be 
imposed  on  the  secondary  schools  of  a  given  school  district  or  munici- 
pality only  by  a  majority  of  the  voters  in  a  local  referendum  on  the 
issue. — Note  by  the  American  Union  Against  Militarism. 

— May,  1Q18. 


".  .  .  universal  military  conscription,  a  curse — although  it  may  at  times  be 
the  less  of  two  evils — but  in  itself  a  curse  to  civilization,  to  nationality,  to  progress, 
to  humanity,  and  to  education." — Senator  John  Sharp  Williams,  of  Mississippi, 
March  29,  igi8. 


AMERICAN  UNION  AGAINST  MILITARISM 

Organized  to  Oppose  the  Adoption  of  a  Permanent  System  of 
Universal  Military  Training  and  Service 

OFFICERS 

Oswald  Garrison  Villard,  Chairman 
Amos  R.  E.  Pinchot,  Vice  Chairman 
Agnes  Brown  Leach,  Treasurer 
Charles  T.  Hallinan,  Executive  Secretary 

EXECUTIVE  COMMITTEE 

Emily  G.  Balch  ,  Owen  R.  Lovejoy 

A.  A.  BerlE  James  H.  Maurer 

Herbert  S.  Bigelow  Mary  McMurtrie 

Frank  Bohn  Henry  R.  Mussey 

Crystal  Eastman  Mary  White  Ovington 

John  Lovejoy  Elliott  Norman  Thomas 

Edmund  C.  Evans  Alexander  Trachtenberg 

Zona  Gale  James  P.  Warbasse 

John  Haynes  Holmes  L.  Hollingsworth  Wood 
David  Starr  Jordan 


HEADQUARTERS. 

203  Westory  Building,  Washington,  D.  C. 
Telephone  Franklin  5930. 


Send  us  your  name,  and  a  contribution  if  you  can. 


"When  a  permanent  military  policy  comes  to  be  adopted,  it  will  doubtless  be 
conceived  in  a  spirit  ...  so  restrained  as  in  no  event  to  .  .  .  excite 
the  apprehension  of  nations  with  whom  it  is  our  first  desire  to  live  in  harmonious  and 
just  accord." — From  annual  report,  1917,  of  Secretary  of  War  Newton  D.  Baker. 


GEN.  BADEN-POWELL 

SAYS: 


D  R    I   L  L  A 


BOY 


AND 


S  P  O  I  L 


A 


SOLDIER 


